 |
 |
I'm just desperate for a cure after 20 years with PD. There is lots of research going on, you'd think something would help. At age 80 there's not much hope. -----Original Message----- From: Trauti Boyd Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 4:16 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: blood test for PD invented but accoerding to the other link you posted, ray - why is a cure taking that long - biomarkers would come in very handy :) ' There is no biomarker. A biomarker is any indicator that can be measured objectively in an individual with a specific disease. It changes with disease progression and treatment. An example of a biomarker would be your cholesterol level measured in blood work No such marker exists in Parkinson's. and this hinders research. Being able to determine which potential therapies are promising and worth pursuing because scientists can see their effect on a measurable biomarker in the lab would be invaluable. For example research into treatments for diabetes can look at blood glucose levels as one of their markers because they know that lower blood sugar levels are good for patients. If a treatment under development helps lower blood glucose, then it is worth pursuing. Having some sort of indicator for PD would allow researchers to focus on those avenues that promise the best results. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rayilyn Brown" <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 2:14 AM Subject: Re: blood test for PD invented >I agree, Kathleen > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kathleen Cochran > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 6:03 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: blood test for PD invented > > In every article I've ever seen about biomarkers, there's text like this > (from the article Ray posted): > > "So if you knew earlier that this was happening you might be able to do > something about it, particularly in the future when maybe better > treatments > might become available." > > Seems to me the helpfulness of biomarkers is pretty seriously limited by > the absence of treatments that will slow or reverse disease progression. > Under present conditions, biomarkers might be seen as stealing a few years > of blissful ignorance, when you don't yet know you have this disease. > > Or insurance companies might find a better way to deny coverage, or > potential employers might choose not to hire someone known to be headed > for > PD. > > If someone can make a case for the value to patients of biomarkers without > better treatment, I would love to hear it. > > Kathleen > > > > > > On 20 April 2016 at 22:00, Rayilyn Brown <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2016/s4446582.htm >> >> Ray >> Rayilyn Brown >> Past Director AZNPF >> Arizona Chapter National Parkinson Foundation >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto: >> [log in to unmask] >> In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] > In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn